|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Researchers reconstruct youtube video from brain via MRI ZOMFGLOL [Re: crkhd]
#15126408 - 09/24/11 08:03 AM (12 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crkhd said:
"How could you reconcile the claims that "the speed of light" wasn't broken but "a speed of light" was?"
Time and time again the media blasts the public with "ZOMFG SPEED OF LIGHT HAS BEEN BROKEN". Then it turns out the speed of light was not broken but a velocity relevant to the behaviour of light exceeded theoretical limits. When we dwell in abstractions there is no end to the rabbit hole. However the speed of light that defines the flow of time fundamentally cannot be broken. Losing the distinctions between various velocities leads people to equate the two concepts time and time again.
When has what you claimed ever happened? " a velocity relevant to the behaviour of light exceeded theoretical limits" ? I don't see much of a difference in reporting this vs the speed of light being broken.
I don't know what your referring to with "the media" but that really has nothing to do with science. Often it seems pretty clear the reporters don't have any idea what they are talking about. Apparently its too much to ask that they get reporters with at least a first-year understanding of the field they're reporting on (or an adviser, which could likely be obtained without cost from a university).
|
crkhd
☾☼☽
Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 2,401
Loc: A human sphere enfolding ...
Last seen: 10 months, 25 days
|
Re: Researchers reconstruct youtube video from brain via MRI ZOMFGLOL [Re: johnm214]
#15126549 - 09/24/11 08:56 AM (12 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3303699/We-have-broken-speed-of-light.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2000/jul/20/technology2
media plural of me·di·a (Noun) 1. The main means of mass communication regarded collectively: "the campaign won media attention".
Every reporter wants to write that article about that cosmically profound event, they have the desire to look back in 20 years at a newspaper clipping of the article and see their name. In their haste to be The One™, idiocy follows. But who doesn't wish to be The One™...
Also,
" a velocity relevant to the behaviour of light exceeded theoretical limits" ?"
Quote:
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109N/lectures/spedlite.html Measurements presumably converged on the correct value of about 93 million miles soon after that, because it appears Römer (or perhaps Huygens, using Römer’s data a short time later) used the correct value for the distance, since the speed of light was calculated to be 125,000 miles per second, about three-quarters of the correct value of 186,300 miles per second. This error is fully accounted for by taking the time light needs to cross the earth’s orbit to be twenty-two minutes (as Römer did) instead of the correct value of sixteen minutes.
As much as theories like to be the ones defining the limits, all theories have their limits.
-------------------- "Everything there is, and all that there is, is a Pattern of unspeakable proportion. The Pattern contains everything that is, completely fixed in succession, all the minimal particles interconnected in every way that is. Every way that is is not every conceivable way, because not everything that can be conceived is manifest in the pattern." "THE Human, you, is a miniscule but essential part of that pattern. In it lies complete fulfillment. It will never become something it is not, but it will never need to be anything else." - Wiccan_Seeker "If boring drudgery was the way of the universe, everything would have killed itself long ago." - Spacerific
Edited by crkhd (09/24/11 09:04 AM)
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Researchers reconstruct youtube video from brain via MRI ZOMFGLOL [Re: crkhd]
#15126724 - 09/24/11 09:53 AM (12 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I don't see the relevance of your post. You quote some historical antecdote where bad assumptions limited the accuracy of the results, however; how does that have anything to do with some violation of theory?
You claimed that the media report on silly things that turn out to be:
" a velocity relevant to the behaviour of light exceeded theoretical limits"
When has this ever happened? What theoretical limit related to some velocity has ever been nbroken with regards to light?
|
crkhd
☾☼☽
Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 2,401
Loc: A human sphere enfolding ...
Last seen: 10 months, 25 days
|
Re: Researchers reconstruct youtube video from brain via MRI ZOMFGLOL [Re: johnm214]
#15126780 - 09/24/11 10:06 AM (12 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Many have theorised light velocity was instant, their theoretical limits were broken.
You're reading too much into the specifics of my words and ignoring the forest, is what I'm saying.
This thread was not about light, it's about neurology. Why are you turning a passing tongue in cheek comment in the OP into an off topic discussion (sure it takes two to tango)? Do you have heavily vested interests in the world of rigorous science that you feel is unable to defend itself?
-------------------- "Everything there is, and all that there is, is a Pattern of unspeakable proportion. The Pattern contains everything that is, completely fixed in succession, all the minimal particles interconnected in every way that is. Every way that is is not every conceivable way, because not everything that can be conceived is manifest in the pattern." "THE Human, you, is a miniscule but essential part of that pattern. In it lies complete fulfillment. It will never become something it is not, but it will never need to be anything else." - Wiccan_Seeker "If boring drudgery was the way of the universe, everything would have killed itself long ago." - Spacerific
Edited by crkhd (09/24/11 10:12 AM)
|
Noteworthy
Sophyphile
Registered: 10/05/08
Posts: 5,599
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Researchers reconstruct youtube video from brain via MRI ZOMFGLOL [Re: crkhd]
#15129563 - 09/24/11 09:33 PM (12 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crkhd said:
You can lose a leg, your qualitative experience of having a leg goes. All sense of touch in that region is also gone, sometimes replaced by nervous system ghosts. It stands to reason that qualia are created by the brain just as software runs on hardware. After all if the senses were evolved over time from a time when they were absent, it stands to reason there really is absolutely nothing special about qualia. They're just another aspect of the universe.
your reasoning is not valid. Im not sure what you think qualia is (but thts ok because it is notoriously difficult to define, basically imposible to define it unambiguously). You might even think that I am defining it wrong.
Lose a leg, no longer feel leg. lose a brain, no longer feel anything in the body.
We know that processing of information occurs in the brain.
So yes the relative information relating one qualia to another is 'created' by the brain.
that doesnt say anything at all about the quality of that experience.
simple spectral inversion example: lets imagine that I see red when you see green but we both call it blue. Theres a wavelength of light related to these experiences. The brain ensures that a certain experience is related to the same wavelength of light. There is nothing about the brain that we know of (or can concieve of) which determines which colour experience we have, however the brain is instrumental and necessary in determining the consistency of the colours we see in certain physical situations. So that we always call a certain wavelength one name and associate certain information with it. Brain is necessary but not sufficient.
btw there is a strong relationship between qualia and the eternal mystery. Im not sure why you think they are so unrelated...
--------------------
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Researchers reconstruct youtube video from brain via MRI ZOMFGLOL [Re: crkhd]
#15130991 - 09/25/11 08:03 AM (12 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crkhd said: Many have theorised light velocity was instant, their theoretical limits were broken.
You're reading too much into the specifics of my words and ignoring the forest, is what I'm saying.
I think you have been using terms incorrectly or perhaps are not aware of what they mean. A scientific theory is not a conjecture or extension of ideas that lack rigorous proof: it is something accepted to be true due to numerous verifications and tests.
"Light traveling instantaneously" was never a theory to my knowledge, and you haven't done any more than to claim it is.
As such, I continue to believe you were in error to observe that theories related to the speed of light have been shown incorrect in the past.
Quote:
This thread was not about light, it's about neurology. Why are you turning a passing tongue in cheek comment in the OP into an off topic discussion (sure it takes two to tango)? Do you have heavily vested interests in the world of rigorous science that you feel is unable to defend itself?
I haven't done anything more than post my thoughts and ask for substantiation. You were the one who claimed some theories regarding light's velocity were disproven in the past, et cet. I meerly asked you to substantiate this.
Now it appears you may have not understood the terminology you were using, which is perhaps frustrating to you, but does not render my observations any less pertinent.
Yes, I have a vested interest in the speed of light being constant as it underlies much of my understanding of the universe and learning on the subject. It would make the results of various experiments I've done and observations I've made quite a bit more confusing than they seemed to be, for example.
As for whether science can defend itself, no, it cannot. Science is a methodology of learning about the relationships between observed phenomena in the universe. it is no more capable of justifying itself than a teapot can defend itself against a man with a bat.
|
|